p4_stream_info

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The word 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose what specific information is returned, whether it requires a client/connection, or how it behaves if the stream does not exist. This is a significant transparency gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clean sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse. However, it is slightly generic and could include more useful context without losing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is too vague to be fully contextual. It states 'detailed information' but doesn't specify what fields are returned, how it differs from p4_stream_graph, or under what conditions it should be used. The tool is simple, but the description insufficiently equips an agent to make an informed decision.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% — both 'path' and 'stream' have descriptions in the input schema. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, but it doesn't need to since the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get detailed information about a specific stream.' The verb 'Get' and the resource 'specific stream' make it distinct from sibling tools like p4_stream_list (which lists streams) and p4_stream_graph. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the verb 'Get' — one would use this when needing details about a single stream. However, the description provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like p4_stream_list or p4_stream_graph, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.